Purdue Pharma bankruptcy plan that shields Sackler family faces Supreme Court review
Long before Purdue Pharma filed for bankruptcy, before the series' "Dopesick" and "Painkiller" brought the Sackler family and devastation of the opioid crisis into Americans' living rooms, and before her son died of a drug overdose at the age of 33, Ellen Isaacs was sounding the alarm about the opioid epidemic.
…
On Monday, Isaacs is set to return to Washington as part of her efforts to fight the bankruptcy plan and, specifically, the decision to release the Sacklers from civil liability for the opioid epidemic. The matter is under review by the Supreme Court, with oral arguments in the case, known as Harrington v. Purdue Pharma L.P., set for Monday morning.
"It's really important to me that these people get held accountable for all the people that they've murdered," Isaacs told CBS News. "They're criminals and they needed to be treated as such."
Good luck. Unfortunately, SCOTUS no longer does what's right and they'll protect the wealthy family, while straight up fucking over victims.
Pray tell, when was this mythical era when the Court only did what's right? Dred Scott in 1857? Upholding forced sterilization in 1927? Upholding Japanese internment during WWII? Plessy v. Ferguson upholding separate but equal in 1896? DC v. Heller in 2008 when it was suddenly decided that the 2nd Amendment granted an essentially unrestricted right to firearm ownership and use? Bush v. Gore in 2000 when the SCOTUS just casually decided an election? Exxon v. Baker in 2008 when they decided that damages from them Exxon Valdez spill should be reduced from $2.5 billion to only $500 million? Citizens United?
I don't think the present circumstances are nearly as historically unusual as you think they are.